alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Order filed February 12, 2020

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals 

__________

No. 11-20-00039-CV

__________

IN RE JERRY VENEGAS

Original Mandamus Proceeding

O R D E R

Relator, Jerry Venegas, has filed in this court an emergency motion for 

temporary relief in conjunction with an original mandamus proceeding. These 

matters relate to a first amended motion to transfer venue in a petition to modify 

parent-child relationship filed in Cause No. B-124,983 in the 446th District Court of 

Ector County, Texas. Relator complains that the Honorable Sara Kate Billingsley 

has a ministerial duty to transfer venue of the petition to modify to Harris County 

where the child resides, but has failed to rule on the motion to transfer venue and has 

set a hearing for February 13, 2020, on the real party in interest’s motion for 

temporary orders. Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.10(b), this 

court grants the motion for temporary relief and hereby orders that the temporary 
2

orders hearing scheduled for February 13, 2020, is temporarily stayed pending 

further order of this court or final disposition of this mandamus proceeding.

Furthermore, pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52.4, this court 

requests that a response to Relator’s petition for writ of mandamus be filed on or 

before February 24, 2020.

PER CURIAM

February 12, 2020 

Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J.,

Stretcher, J., and Wright, S.C.J.1

Willson, J., not participating.

1

Jim R. Wright, Senior Chief Justice (Retired), Court of Appeals, 11th District of Texas at Eastland, 

sitting by assignment.
No. 67810.

#### Lion Sales & Mfg. Co. *v.*United States,

protests 62/5414 and 62/7603 (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of brass aerators similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 65882, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
**Exhibit 21**

**SUBSIDIARIES OF INNOVEX, INC.**

| **Name**                           |   | **State or other jurisdiction of    Incorporation or Organization** |
|------------------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                    |   |                                                                     |
| Innovex Precision Components, Inc. |   | Minnesota                                                           |
|                               |   |                                                                |
| Innovex Southwest, Inc.            |   | Delaware                                                            |
|                               |   |                                                                |
| ADFlex Cayman Ltd.                 |   | Cayman Island                                                       |
|                               |   |                                                                |
| Innovex (Thailand) Ltd.            |   | Thailand                                                            |
|                               |   |                                                                |
| ADFlex Solutions Ltd.              |   | Delaware                                                            |
|                               |   |                                                                |
| ADFlex Mexico S.A. de C.V.         |   | Mexico                                                              |
|                               |   |                                                                |
| Iconovex Corporation               |   | Minnesota                                                           |
|                               |   |                                                                |
| Innovex Limited                    |   | Minnesota                                                           |
|                               |   |                                                                |
| Mar Engineering, Inc.              |   | Minnesota                                                           |
No. 64827.

#### Iceland Products, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 59/19352 (New York).

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of fish similar in all material respects to the fish blocks the subject of *The Lee Herrmann Co., a/c The Coldwater Seafood Corp.*v. *United States*(43 Cust. Ct. 49, C.D. 2101), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Before the First Division,

April 2, 1953

No. 57243.

protests 483786-G, etc. (New York).

#### A. S. Gold & Bro., Inc. *v.*United States,

*411Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the kidskin plates are similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Kung Chen Fur Corpn.*v. *United States*(29 Cust. Ct. 266, C. D. 1480), the claim for free entry under paragraph 1681 was sustained.

.Ford, J., concurred.

Mollison, J., dissented for the reasons set forth in his dissenting opinion in C. D. 1480, *supra.*
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

Honorable Kla Pike 

County Attorney 

Hartley County 

Dalhart, Texas 

Dear Sir: 

Opinion No. 0-M 

lcdependent ec 

;:‘e have your lette 

upon a question stated in sub 

uesting our oplnlon 

Kay the Coun 

territory rrom one 

independect school 

the trusteee of th 

such territor.y is 

majority of the qu 

rusteea transter 

let to another 

fer la opposed by 

riot iroE which 

as follows 

from one school dlstrlct and 

,and further ProvldlnE for the 

s an? uelng, the latest legislative 

is controlling under the facts set 

s statute among other things provides 

ded further that before any portion of any 

any part thereof detached an election shall 

be held at uhich the qualified t&x ;~ayin~: voters oi such 

district sou&t to be divided shall first vote by a n;ajorlty 

vote to divide said district and shall define the part of 

said orlsinal district sdu@t to be detached;” 

Tze lax pertaining to your question is fully~\ALBGU3SBd 

Lr our opinion X0. O-275, written by ilonorable Cecil C. Cammck, 

Fionorablo i-iilliaz J. R. Wng and t&is writer, addressed to h‘onOrable Gilbert Smith, County Attorney, Jones County, Uson, Texas, 

and approved in conference by this Dopartnent; a copy of said 

opinion is enolosed herewith. 
_I . 

ERS :AxK 

F;NCLOSURE 

Honorable King Fiks, tags 2 

Trusting that the above satisfeotorlly answers your 

question, we are 

Very truly yours 

ASSISTAXT 

APPROVED 

OPINION 0 COMMITTEE 

By 65%2& 

c**‘“Y4*
Part 2

SUPPLEMENT

DRAFT 

No Name Description Rule Attribute Combination

17E Prior Year Adjustment Code

Prior Year Adjustment Code is required for the applicable USSGL accounts.

USSGL ACCOUNT 

NUMBER

PRIOR YEAR 

ADJUSTMENT CODE TAS STATUS

Fail 462000 X E

70E

Limited Use of USSGL 415100 with Authority Type Code "P"

The use of USSGL 415100 with Authority Type Code "P" is limited to specific Treasury Account Symbols.

BEA CATEGORY 

INDICATOR

CONCATENATED 

TAS

Pass D

01420172028 

5639000

90

Disaster Emergency Fund Code Domain Value Restrictions

The use of DEF Code domain values other than "Q" is limited to specific fund families. Fail

DISASTER 

EMERGENCY FUND 

CODE

=K=L=M=N=O

90E

Disaster Emergency Fund Code Domain Value Restrictions

The use of DEF Code domain values other than "Q" is limited to specific fund families.

DISASTER 

EMERGENCY FUND 

CODE Fund Family

Pass E 0910800Pass G 0171106Pass G 0171109Pass G 0171319Pass G 0171804Pass G 0171810Pass G 0212065Pass G 0573010Pass G 0573080Pass G 0573400Pass G 0700530Pass G 0700532Pass G 0974930Pass H 0700702Pass H 0731152Pass I 0120019Pass I 0120115Pass I 0120120Pass I 0120121Pass I 0120122Pass I 0120124Pass I 0120125Pass I 0120126Pass I 0120127Pass I 0120128Pass I 0120129Pass I 0120130Pass I 0120131Pass I 0120132Pass I 0120150Pass I 0120176

U.S. Standard General Ledger

Data Validations - Detail

Bulletin No. 2020-10 DRAFT VII VDR - 1 
Part 2

SUPPLEMENT

DRAFT 

No Name Description Rule Attribute Combination

U.S. Standard General Ledger

Data Validations - Detail

Pass I 0120177Pass I 0120601Pass I 0123701Pass I 0171205Pass I 0212085Pass I 0212086Pass I 0573300Pass I 0750140Pass I 0970500Pass J 0121121Pass J 0140130Pass K 0110400Pass K 0111008Pass K 0118581Pass K 0121600Pass K 0131450Pass K 0141611Pass K 0160165Pass K 0680103Pass K 0680108

99E USSGL Reimbursable Flag "R" Restriction

The use of some USSGL accounts with Reimbursable Flag "R" is limited to specific TAS.

USSGL ACCOUNT 

NUMBER

CONCATENATED 

TAS

Pass 426600 075 X4554000

106

Restricted Use of USSGL 413700 with BEA "D" and PYA "P"

Reporting USSGL account 413700 with BEA Category Indicator "D" and Prior Year Adjustment Code "P" is restricted to specific TAS. Fail

USSGL ACCOUNT 

NUMBER

BEA CATEGORY 

INDICATOR

PRIOR YEAR 

ADJUSTMENT COD

=413700 =D =P

106E

Restricted Use of USSGL 413700 with BEA "D" and PYA "P"

Reporting USSGL account 413700 with BEA Category Indicator "D" and Prior Year Adjustment Code "P" is restricted to specific TAS.

CONCATENATED 

TAS

Pass 069 X8083000Pass

069069 X8083001

Pass

069069 X8083006

Pass

069069 X8083007

Pass

069069 X8083011

Pass

069069 X8083014

Pass

069069 X8083017

Pass

069069 X8083026

Pass

069069 X8083030

Bulletin No. 2020-10 DRAFT VII VDR - 2
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13**  **- 1714** 

HENDRICK TOWNSEND , Plaintiff

– Appellant ,
v. COUNTY OF ACCOMACK, Department of Building and Zoning; DAVID FLUHART, Director; STEVEN MINER, County Administrator; MARK BOWDEN; TOM WILLET; DAVE ENGLEHART; GRACIE MILBOURNE; WALTER WESSELS; LARRY GIDDENS; TODD GODWIN; BILLY MURPHY, Deputy; THOMAS DIX; NANCY MATTHEWS , Defendants

- Appellees
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Norfolk
. Mark S. Davis , District Judge. ( 2:12

- cv - 00305

- MSD

- LRL )

Submitted : September 26, 2013 Decided: September 30, 2013

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and WYNN , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. Hendrick Townsend, Appellant Pro Se. Samuel Lawrence Dumville, NORRIS & ST. CLAIR P.C., Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Hen d rick Townsend appeals the district court ’ s order dismissing his civil case
. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Townsend v. Cnty. of Accomack , No. 2:12

- cv - 00305

- MSD

- LRL (E.D. Va. Apr. 30, 2013)
. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 8 (Friday, January 12, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 1498]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-292]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

 [Docket No. CP06-426-002]


Discovery Gas Transmission LLC; Notice Of Compliance Filing

January 5, 2006.
    Take notice that on December 29, 2006, Discovery Gas Transmission 
LLC (Discovery) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, 
Original Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, to be effective 
December 1, 2006:

Sixth Revised Sheet No. 101
First Revised Sheet No. 188
Second Revised Sheet No. 199

    Discovery also filed the following alternate tariff sheet, to be 
effective upon Commission approval:

Alternate First Revised Sheet No. 188

    Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance 
with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 
CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing will be considered by the 
Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will 
not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Such protests 
must be filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing a 
protest must serve a copy of that document on all the parties to the 
proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu 
of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons 
unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies 
of the protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First 
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    This filing is accessible online at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#a7e1e2f5e4e8c9cbcec9c2f4d2d7d7c8d5d3e7c1c2d5c489c0c8d1"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="fbbdbea9b8b4959792959ea88e8b8b94898fbb9d9e8998d59c948d">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.
    Protest Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on January 23, 2007.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-292 Filed 1-11-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
No. 58461.

protest 207786-K (Philadelphia).

#### Philadelphia Brokerage Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J:

It appeared from the official papers that the merchandise was entered for warehouse on or about June 1, 1944, and that the entry was liquidated on December 16, 1944. The entry was reliquidated on May 16, 1952, and the protest was filed against said reliquidation. At the trial, it was stipulated that 4,692 wine gallons of brandy were actually withdrawn and that if the collector now had the merchandise and entry before him, he would assess duty and taxes upon the basis of 4,692 wine gallons. In view of the stipulation and for the reasons stated in *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained, and the collector was directed to re-reliquidate the entry accordingly.
United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________

September 27, 2019

ERRATUM

______________________

Appeal No. 2018-1635

SIPCO, LLC,

Appellant

v.

EMERSON ELECTRIC CO.,

Appellee

Decided: September 25, 2019

Precedential Opinion

______________________

The following change has been made:

Page 2, line 5, of the opinion concurring-in-part and 

dissenting-in-part, “tenants” has been changed to “tenets”.
Exhibit 31.2

Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Brian H. Davis, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending September
30, 2005 for IEC Electronics Corp.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements and other financial
information included in this report fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15 d-15(e) for the registrant and have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and,

c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal
quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.


Dated:  November 18, 2005                     /s/ Brian H. Davis
                                              --------------------
                                              Brian H. Davis
                                              Vice President, Chief Financial
                                              Officer and Controller


                                  Page 45 of 46
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

                       TERAYON COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS, INC.

                                  CERTIFICATION

In connection with the periodic report of Terayon Communication Systems, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Arthur T. Taylor,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof,
solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States
Code, that to the best of my knowledge:

      (3)   the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
            15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and

      (4)   the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Company at the dates and for the periods indicated.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained
by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.

This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, "filed" with the
Securities and Exchange Commission.

Date: August 14, 2003
                                              /s/ Arthur T. Taylor
                                              ---------------------------------
                                              Arthur T. Taylor
                                              Chief Financial Officer
March 23, 1953

No. 57229.

Suit 4690.

#### United States *v.*Henry W. Peabody & Co.

Reap. Dec. 7999 reversed April 8, 1952. C. A. D. 498. (C. A. D. 498 reaffirmed November 4, 1952.)
### Docket **No. FAA -** **20 12**  **- 0142**  **Contacts.** With whom outside the FAA has this proposal been discussed? Organization Person Contacted Date Response Transport Canada Helen Tsai 613 - 952 -

4362 11/15/10 Sent email. Bom bardier Chester Liburski

(514) 855 - 5001 ext. 29036 11/15/10 Sent email. Regional Airline Association Connie Arnold

202 - 367 - 1252 11/30/10 Sent email.
(Reap. Dec. 8141)

#### E. Dlllingham, Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 0-599.

(Decided July 24, 1952)

*Eric C. Gordon*for the plaintiff.

*Charles J. Wagner,*Acting Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Oliveb, Chief Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon tbe following stipulation of counsel for tbe parties hereto:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED as follows, between the Counsel for the plaintiff and the Assistant Attorney General for the United States, concerning the merchandise referred to herein:

> 1. This appeal to re-appraisement involves seventeen (17) bales of nylon waste synthetic fibre type 3A of a net quantity of 4894.2 pounds, imported from Canada at the port of Alexandria Bay, New York, on November 25th, 1949 by the plaintiff for the account of Hartford Spinning, Inc., of Unionville, Connecticut.

> 2. As to the merchandise herein, there is no foreign value thereof, as defined in Section 402 (a) and (c) of the Tariff Act of 1930.

> *4483. As to the merchandise involved herein, there existed an export value of sixty (.60) cents per pound, United States funds net packed, *which was the*market value or the price, at the time of exportation of such merchandise to the United States at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of Canada, the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade for exportation to the United States, plus when not included in such price, the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature, and all other costs, charges and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition, packed ready for shipment to the United States.

> 4. The instant appealed to re-appraisement shall be submitted on this stipulation.

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such value was United States dollars 0.60 per pound, net packed.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.